SynthesisThe Korean journal of internal medicine2026
Assessment tools for peripheral neuropathy in multiple myeloma.
Synthesis in The Korean journal of internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advances in treating multiple myeloma (MM) have improved survival, shifting the management focus toward quality of life. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) is a common treatment-related toxicity that significantly impairs quality of life. However, standardized assessment methods for PN in patients with MM are currently lacking. A comprehensive search of multiple databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed) was conducted to identify relevant records. Eligible studies were reviewed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Twenty-two studies were included, and 17 PN assessment tools were identified. Nerve conduction studies and the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events were the most commonly used clinician-based tools, whereas the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity was the most frequently used patient-reported outcome measure. The use of these tools varies depending on whether their purpose is diagnostic or evaluative. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to evaluate PN assessment tools for patients with MM, revealing substantial heterogeneity across studies. By organizing these diverse approaches, our findings can guide researchers and clinicians toward a more consistent and standardized PN evaluation, ultimately improving the management of treatment-related neuropathy in MM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.